Where did the universe come from? Atheistic origin science has no answer.

[Rampant.A.I.]

Earlier versions of the cosmological argument did just say "everything that exists has a cause." The Kalam variant was specifically formulated to dodge the infinite regression problem which, to me, is a clear as day signal as to just how mercenary and dishonest this argument is.

No extra information had been discovered, no new thoughts had been thought: the argument just changed, adding in another bare assertion, specifically because there was an objection to the initial version that was irrefutable. It's just moving the goalposts and hoping nobody will notice.

[/hide]'infinite regression' is what you want to hold onto. general relativity describes (there have been 11 independent scientific observations) the movements of bodies in the universe and when this movement is traced on a timeline, it goes to a mathematical zero point: that is; space, time, energy, mass all register zero. so i'm not trying to avoid it, it's dead-on- arrival.
"Because otherwise we ask what created god and the whole argument falls apart". people that understand that God isn't confined to this cosmic timeline don't ask that question because an entity not constrained by time need not have been created. the physical laws only apply to this universe.

As you've pointed out, physical laws, and laws concerning causality only apply to the existent universe.

The same description applies prior to the existence of the observable universe, of which causality is an artifact.

Prior to the existing universe, there is no reason to assume qualities of space time, like cause-effect causality applied.

In fact, linear causality may not always apply within the universe.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/physic...he-future/

---

'infinite regression' is you what to hold onto.

There is fundamentally nothing wrong with infinite regression, never was and never will be, logically you can argue that it is, but physically, there is nothing wrong with it, really

It's a non-issue exempt to afraid of the dark types. We have a coherent network of justifiably true beliefs about reality to base knowledge on.

You know, all of this panic about infinite regress is based solely on a guy who had a crisis and rented a cabin to get really drunk, and ponder how he could know he existed, and a bunch of other wildly solipsistic theories on top of that.

And then in the late 90's, some guys got together and produced an action film starring Keanu Reeves, that proposed the same "deeply philosophical questions" as your local Community College intro to Philosophy night class, books were written referencing The Matrix as "the most philosophical movie of all time," and not unlike any other intro to Philosophy course, every idiot exposed to the ideas thought they were the greatest thing ever, and had solutions to propose that "nobody had ever thought of before, man, never!" Without doing any of the reading.

...Not unlike those who "introduce" this forum to ontological arguments, as if no one has ever heard of them before, and there are no objections.